RYA:

[Tranona]

If you book a cruise with Le Boat for example you will be issued with a "temporary permit" following a period of instruction by the operator.

I will leave you to find out exactly how and why this arrangement exists.

 

[Phoenix of Hamble]

The RYA is a wonderful business model. It has the cachet of 'Royal' - why? I don't know. It is a Company Limited by Guarantee, not an arm of the British Government, or a charity, or a professional body. It is simply a commercial entity.

I'm more inclined to agree with Toad and Chinita on this one.... a close friend gleefully informed me last week that his dinghy club is being assessed at the final stage for one of several 'elite status' clubs in the UK.... this apparently brings several benefits with it, including the RYA providing and maintaining fleets of boats in at least two, possibly three classes, supporting ribs, supplying a fully equipped gym, and Concept rowing machines....

I can't help but feel that this is a bigger investment in dinghies and racing than the investment neccessary for a lifetime of free ICC supply, and one that adequately demonstrates the inequity in investment in yachting versus dinghy racing.... its no wonder there is an undercurrent of dissatisfaction amongst many I speak to.....everything we want or need is only available for a fee'.... while our dinghy counterparts have cash thrown at them in a chase for Olympic glory.

 

[Bru]

I'm more inclined to agree with Toad and Chinita on this one.... a close friend gleefully informed me last week that his dinghy club is being assessed at the final stage for one of several 'elite status' clubs in the UK.... this apparently brings several benefits with it, including the RYA providing and maintaining fleets of boats in at least two, possibly three classes, supporting ribs, supplying a fully equipped gym, and Concept rowing machines....

I can't help but feel that this is a bigger investment in dinghies and racing than the investment neccessary for a lifetime of free ICC supply, and one that adequately demonstrates the inequity in investment in yachting versus dinghy racing.... its no wonder there is an undercurrent of dissatisfaction amongst many I speak to.....everything we want or need is only available for a fee'.... while our dinghy counterparts have cash thrown at them in a chase for Olympic glory.

All valid points with which I broadly agree (which is why I'm not an RYA member) but none of which makes RYA "simply a commercial entity" as Chinita stated. Quite the opposite really

 

[toad_oftoadhall]

I'm more inclined to agree with Toad and Chinita

Just to be clear my comments have been specifically about the ICC/CEVNI. I made no comment about the RYA as a whole. In fact, in my experience the RYA have been very generous with cash on projects I've been interested it. I think when it comes to RYA grants if you don't ask you don't get.

If the only thing they ever did was handicapping management and dealing with the ISAF over the RRS that would make their existence well worthwhile, and I'm sure they do a lot more than that.

Mind you, as I said a few days ago you can argue it either way so Phoenix's points seem perfectly reasonable to me. How money should be raised & spent is pretty subjective.

 

[Tranona]

I'm more inclined to agree with Toad and Chinita on this one.... a close friend gleefully informed me last week that his dinghy club is being assessed at the final stage for one of several 'elite status' clubs in the UK.... this apparently brings several benefits with it, including the RYA providing and maintaining fleets of boats in at least two, possibly three classes, supporting ribs, supplying a fully equipped gym, and Concept rowing machines....

I can't help but feel that this is a bigger investment in dinghies and racing than the investment neccessary for a lifetime of free ICC supply, and one that adequately demonstrates the inequity in investment in yachting versus dinghy racing.... its no wonder there is an undercurrent of dissatisfaction amongst many I speak to.....everything we want or need is only available for a fee'.... while our dinghy counterparts have cash thrown at them in a chase for Olympic glory.

I think you will find that the finance for this comes from central government funds specifically for the development of sport. It does not come from members contributions, nor from the commercial activities. The published accounts are very clear about sources of finance and how they are used. The government funds are ring fenced and are accounted for separately.

 

[toad_oftoadhall]

published accounts

http://www.rya.org.uk/SiteCollectionDocuments/legal/RYA_ARAA_2012.pdf

 

[chinita]

All valid points with which I broadly agree (which is why I'm not an RYA member) but none of which makes RYA "simply a commercial entity" as Chinita stated. Quite the opposite really

Sadly, if they were not simply a commercial entity they would be able to address a problem posed to them logically, professionally and accurately.

Instead, they come up with this tosh:

http://lagosnavigators.net/html/Legislation Policy.html

 

[Tranona]

Sadly, if they were not simply a commercial entity they would be able to address a problem posed to them logically, professionally and accurately.

Instead, they come up with this tosh:

http://lagosnavigators.net/html/Legislation Policy.html

So what is your problem with that? They have addressed the "problem", taken the matter up on behalf of members with the Portuguese authorities who have advised their policy in the matter. They (the Portuguese) are considered to be legally within their rights to adopt that policy. The RYA has informed members.

What do you expect them to do - send in the gunboats?

You may well consider the Portuguese government's policy is irrational and illogical but they are a sovereign state and can decide their own regulations. If you think their policy violates international treaties or EU directives, then gather your evidence and ask the RYA and the British government to pursue the matter on your behalf.

 

[Bru]

Sadly, if they were not simply a commercial entity they would be able to address a problem posed to them logically, professionally and accurately.

Instead, they come up with this tosh:

http://lagosnavigators.net/html/Legislation Policy.html

I fear that whatever point you're trying to make is completely lost on me

I'm genuinely mystified since the only interpretation I can possibly come up with of that article is entirely positive as far as the RYA is concerned

?

 

[chinita]

Tranona,

Is this correct:

Policy decision made

As a result they made the policy decision that for pleasure craft Portuguese rules should only apply to vessels that stay for longer than a total of 180 days in a 365 day period.

This is in line with the criteria for non-nationals to become responsible for property taxes payment in Portugal.


So, I am resident in UK, I leave my boat in Portugal all year round but only sail her for 7 days. I must conform to the Portuguese regulations?

You, of all people, are constantly reminding people that the 180 day rule is everything to do with residency of the individual and nothing to do with location of the boat. Aren't you?

 

[chinita]

I fear that whatever point you're trying to make is completely lost on me

I'm genuinely mystified since the only interpretation I can possibly come up with of that article is entirely positive as far as the RYA is concerned

?

Read my post above.

 

[Bru]

Read my post above.

So you have a beef with the Portuguese authorities

and I'm guessing that although the RYA have had some success in persuading the Portuguese to make concessions, you're not happy with that outcome

fair enough but I still fall to see how that in any way shape or form affects the commercial status of the RYA?

 

[chinita]

So you have a beef with the Portuguese authorities

and I'm guessing that although the RYA have had some success in persuading the Portuguese to make concessions, you're not happy with that outcome

fair enough but I still fall to see how that in any way shape or form affects the commercial status of the RYA?

I really think you need to get up to speed with this particular matter and the history before you comment.

The Portuguese Bureaucracy issue has been going on for at least a year now.

On the advice of many (including Tranona, I think I recall), the RYA was informed of the concerns of those yachtsmen basing their boats in Portugal. In a nutshell, non-Portuguese flagged yachts being boarded, searched by the Navy or Maritime Police and ordered back to port, possibly fined, for not carrying 'safety' equipment; equipment well outside the requirements of even the RORC. If you wish to view this list, it is available on the Lagos Navigators site.

The RYA has, somehow, allowed this to be linked this to a 180 day Residency rule and the Portuguese bizarre tax regime! viz:

'This is in line with the criteria for non-nationals to become responsible for property taxes payment in Portugal.'


What on earth has this got to do with safety at sea?

Far from the RYA persuading the Portuguese authorities to make 'concessions' they have made matters worse for those who keep their yachts in the country. By the letter of the RYA statement he 180 day rule now appears to apply to property (boats) rather than individuals. If this was applied in Spain there would be uproar.



How does this affect the commercial status of the RYA? Well, it does not - directly. However, IMO, the RYA has not fully addressed the Portuguese issue (they think they have, and have told the concerned yachtsmen of Lagos that the matter is 'not open for discussion' -LOL!!).

Whether you agree or not, the matter has not been resolved.

 

[Tranona]

You are confusing two issues here. The first is whether the Portuguese government has the right to impose these regulations. If you recall earlier in the saga, the ministry advised the RYA that the regulations did not apply to foreign registered boats, although some local officials seemed to be applying them. The RYA sought clarification and the ministry then changed its story and said the regulations did apply under certain conditions - that is when the boat had been in Portugal for longer than 180 days.

The only question then is does the ministry have the power under Portuguese law to make this decision and will the regulation be applied consistently. Unless you know differently one has to assume that they do have the power, but it would be useful to know the precise law that gives them that power.

The second issue, which you are now raising is whether the regulation is founded on sound principles in relation to the way the qualifying period is defined, or whether there is precedent or overriding principles (for example from the EU directives) for a different way of determining the qualifying period. As to whether the RYA has "allowed" the Portuguese government to determine this method - please explain what power they have to stop them? They could mount a legal challenge if they believe a law or international treaty has been broken, but guess they have taken the decision that such a course of action would fail or not make any difference to the principle.

You will recall no doubt that the RYA has been successful in the past in bringing action to persuade governments to repeal laws, for example the Greek law on Transit logs as applied to EU residents. They were successful (with the support of the UK government) because they could show that the Greek legislation was illegal under EU freedom of movement directives. They had exactly the same success in getting the Greeks to remove the restrictions on British registered boats operating as charter vessels in Greece. They have also had some success lately with the Belgian authorities over red diesel, pending the outcome of the current action with the European Commission.

You are falling into the trap of expecting the RYA (or any other NGO) to be able to force governments to take particular actions. They cannot. They can lobby and they can bring actions on behalf of members. If you think the Portuguese government is acting unlawfully then collect your evidence, present it to the RYA and the government and try and persuade them to take action.

 

[Bru]

I really think you need to get up to speed with this particular matter and the history before you comment.

I don't think I do really since the bone of contention isn't the situation in Portugal (which I freely concede I know nothing about and further admit is of zero interest to me) but what that situation has to do with the commercial or otherwise status of the RYA. Which you yourself now concede is nothing

As Tranona says, you are confusing two issues although not, in fact, the two issues Tranona goes on to discuss!

Anyway, I'm really not the least bit interested in getting involved in a long and convoluted argument about this nor am I an apologist for or defender of the RYA*, I just corrected a common misunderstanding of limited by guarantee companies.

* Rather the opposite having a whole litany of beefs about the organisation myself (mostly relating to it's sticking it's nose in on Inland Waterways matters without knowing WTF they were on about but that too is another story)

 

[Tranona]

I don't think I do really since the bone of contention isn't the situation in Portugal (which I freely concede I know nothing about and further admit is of zero interest to me) but what that situation has to do with the commercial or otherwise status of the RYA. Which you yourself now concede is nothing

As Tranona says, you are confusing two issues although not, in fact, the two issues Tranona goes on to discuss!

Anyway, I'm really not the least bit interested in getting involved in a long and convoluted argument about this nor am I an apologist for or defender of the RYA*, I just corrected a common misunderstanding of limited by guarantee companies.

* Rather the opposite having a whole litany of beefs about the organisation myself (mostly relating to it's sticking it's nose in on Inland Waterways matters without knowing WTF they were on about but that too is another story)

Yes, not worth debating the status of the RYA as this is perfectly clear and follows correct legal practice in its structure. It is very clear that like most similar organisations it performs multiple roles, some of which involve representing members' interests (as in the case of the Portuguese issue) and others involve commercial activities. Just nonsense to say that one impacts negatively on the other, other than surpluses from commercial activities can be used to fund members' interests.

 

[chinita]

II just corrected a common misunderstanding of limited by guarantee companies.

For which I am grateful and thank you.

 

[chinita]

You are falling into the trap of epecting the RYA (or any other NGO) to be able to force governments to take particular actions. They cannot. They can lobby and they can bring actions on behalf of members. If you think the Portuguese government is acting unlawfully then collect your evidence, present it to the RYA and the government and try and persuade them to take action.

But this has already been done - on the advice of people like yourself.

'Rallyveteran' wrote to the RYA and published their reply on this site (it was pulled for copyright reasons). However, this is what he said:

'I'm certain that if you were responsible for writing the relevant section of the RYA's website you would have found a clearer way of expressing the limit than to say it is in line with the criteria for non-nationals to become responsible for property taxes payment in Portugal. It is hardly surprising that RYA members are confused by this.'


So, it would appear that I am not alone in my trap.

 

[Tranona]

Forgive me for being thick but there is no indication that it is the RYA that is setting the 180 day period, nor the justification for it. They are reporting what the Portuguese ministry has decided.

There is a certain amount of logic that it should be connected to the time the boat is in their territory, not the owner, otherwise there would have to be a system to log the days that you are there, or even the days you are using the boat.

Lets face it, they have decided they want to apply their regulations to all boats that are determined to be in their territorial waters and not on innocent passage - that is the distinction, not the method they use to determine the difference. They are breaking away from the principle of comity that other states adhere to, but they are within their rights to do this.

It is obvious that there are flaws in the way that they have gone about it, but it would be difficult to make a case that it is wrong on safety grounds (which is one of their reported reasons) as we know that UK is out of step with most other nations in not having prescriptive safety equipment requirements. The period of grace allowed by the 180 days allows genuine visitors who are passing through to avoid compliance, so it is really difficult to see how anybody could object to the principle.

The issue should be about whether they have followed the correct procedures to put the policy into law, and perhaps more importantly will it be applied consistently. On past performance it is the latter that is likely to be the major problem with so much power devolved to local officials. However, most seasoned cruising sailors are familiar with such problems and no doubt will resolve them as they go.

 

[chinita]

Forgive me for being thick but there is no indication that it is the RYA that is setting the 180 day period, nor the justification for it. They are reporting what the Portuguese ministry has decided.

So, the RYA reports the decision of the Portuguese Maritime Authority (whoever they may be?) which is to link the activities of Portuguese based EU yachts to the criteria for non-nationals to become responsible for property taxes payment in Portugal.

And all is ok.

As I recall - having been there whilst all this was going on - there was never an issue about a 180 day rule. It was (quite rightly) all about safety. All that was requested of the RYA (as an example) was to express the illogicality that a yacht, having sailed from UK to Portugal with an RORC flare pack, should not then be expected to have additional flares (buying flares in Portugal is a particular problem - but I would not expect you to know that) whilst in Portuguese waters.

Then, suddenly, out of the blue we are confronted with a ridiculous outcome linked to ex-pat property taxation. You couldn't make it up!

And that is it, end of discussion - as far as the RYA is concerned.

So, we have gone from a safety issue to a tax and residency issue.

Frankly, I wish that the RYA had never been invited to the party. My candid view is that this problem has been given to a functionary, well out of his/her depth and has obfuscated matters to such an extent that the Portuguese 'authorities' have fallen back on their old favourite - tax.